Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

water jugs (Re: Jesus and JB in Jn

Expand Messages
  • Yuri Kuchinsky
    ... Dear Paul, Could you please suggest some reason why the author of the Magdalene Gospel would have intentionally replaced 20 or 30 gallon jugs with 3
    Message 1 of 17 , Mar 3, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      On Fri, 1 Mar 2002, Paul Schmehl wrote:

      > I am not convinced that "shorter" or "less developed" equates to
      > antiquity. It could equate to a damaged exemplar, a lazy scribe,
      > intentional shortening,

      Dear Paul,

      Could you please suggest some reason why the author of the Magdalene
      Gospel would have intentionally replaced "20 or 30 gallon" jugs with "3
      gallon" jugs?

      > and a host of other possibilities. In an earlier post you stated
      > something to the effect that the "shorter reading rule" was an
      > accepted fact of TC. That "fact" is now being questioned, and I think
      > there are cases where the shortening is quite possibly deliberate.
      > In any case, I certainly don't think it's as cut and dried as you seem
      > to think it is.

      Actually, I'm in basic agreement with you here. While the "shorter reading
      rule" is indeed a widely accepted rule of TC today, myself, I do see some
      considerable limitations of this. In fact, recently I've been moving
      closer to the Byzantine text supporters, who, of course, have challenged
      this rule.

      And yet, at the same time, this particular case of Jn 2:6 is not
      necessarily relevant to this. Because here it's the size of the jugs that
      is mostly in question, rather than the reading just being shorter or
      longer.

      Regards,

      Yuri.

      Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.trends.ca/~yuku

      The goal proposed by Cynic philosophy is apathy, which is
      equivalent to becoming God -=O=- Julian

      > ----- Original Message -----
      > From: "Yuri Kuchinsky" <yuku@...>
      > To: <johannine_literature@yahoogroups.com>
      > Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 3:08 PM
      > Subject: [John_Lit] Re: Jesus and JB in Jn
      > >
      > > I'm glad you've picked up on this important detail. Indeed, the Johannine
      > > episode of "Turning Water Into Wine" is quite different in the Magdalene
      > > Gospel in a number of respects. Among them, is the size of the water jugs.
      > > In MG 10:6, they are 3 gallons, while in the canonical Jn 2:6 they are "20
      > > or 30 gallons". Surely the Magdalene version seems more primitive, since
      > > it appears to be less developed?
    • Yuri Kuchinsky
      On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, kymhsm wrote: [Yuri:] ... Kym, Still, I m wondering if the dependence on Genesis, that you re advocating, would have constituted a
      Message 2 of 17 , Mar 3, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, kymhsm wrote:

        [Yuri:]
        > >So I would not necessarily agree that the mythological > events
        > from the OT would have overwhelmed the historical base of the >
        > gospels to a very great degree.>

        > The 'historical base' is not 'overwhelmed', but John has used the
        > Genesis structure to in clude ideas additional to those in the
        > plain text. He has shown two main things with this stucture.
        > >From Genesis 1 (Jn 1:1-11:44), that the Word who became flesh
        > and dwelt among us, Jesus, was the one created all things (c.f.
        > Jn 1:3) and, from Genesis 2 (Jn 11:45-20:29), to express a
        > sublime First Adam / Second Adam theology - all the more
        > sublime because it is the pre-Fall Adam with whom he is
        > drawing the parallels.

        Kym,

        Still, I'm wondering if the dependence on Genesis, that you're advocating,
        would have constituted a sufficient warrant to remove the mention of the
        baptism of Jesus by John.

        In other words, the baptism of Jesus by John seems to have been a real
        historical event. So do you think that the Genesis motifs, alone, could
        have been enough reason for masking this event in Jn?

        So there seem to have been some other reasons for masking this event in
        Jn...

        Yuri.

        Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.trends.ca/~yuku

        The goal proposed by Cynic philosophy is apathy, which is
        equivalent to becoming God -=O=- Julian
      • kymhsm
        Dear Yuri, ... advocating, would have constituted a sufficient warrant to remove the mention of the baptism of Jesus by John. ... real historical event.
        Message 3 of 17 , Mar 3, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          Dear Yuri,

          > Still, I'm wondering if the dependence on Genesis, that you're
          advocating,> would have constituted a sufficient warrant to remove
          the mention of the > baptism of Jesus by John.
          >
          > In other words, the baptism of Jesus by John seems to have been a
          real > historical event. So do you think that the Genesis motifs,
          alone, could > have been enough reason for masking this event in Jn?>

          I do not think that John has masked JB's baptism of Jesus at all. It
          is just that he has not detailed the event. Rather, he has spoken of
          the *significance* of the event in identifying the Christ.

          The Genesis structure may have been sufficient reason not to detail
          it because that structure is built mostly upon the *events* of the
          gospel. For instance, the six days in which something new was created
          in Gen 1 are reflected by the six miracles or signs of Jn 2:1 -
          11:45. We are accostomed to thinking of seven signs but it seems that
          Jesus' walking on the water (while undoubtedly a sign for the
          apostles) does not bear the same significnce as the healings etc.

          On the other hand, John does include the event of Jesus' clearing of
          the temple without that affecting the structure, though he excludes
          it from the signs (and so from the Genesis structure) by placing it
          between the first two signs, both of which he nominates as such
          (2:11; 4:54).

          Sincerely,

          Kym Smith
          Adelaide
          South Australia
          khs@...
        • Horace Jeffery Hodges
          ... For John the Baptist s disciples, I would expect more preparation and commitment associated with a baptism, but I doubt that the multitudes coming for
          Message 4 of 17 , Mar 3, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:

            > Well, Jeffery, I suppose this would depend on just
            > how meaningful you
            > think JB's baptism was. If one thinks of it as a
            > mere formality, something
            > that required little in the way of preparation and
            > commitment, then being
            > baptised by JB would be no big deal at all. But I
            > think such a view of
            > JB's baptism may be a little oversimplified.

            For John the Baptist's disciples, I would expect more
            preparation and commitment associated with a baptism,
            but I doubt that the multitudes coming for baptism fit
            this. Simply referring to a baptism by John the
            Baptist is thus too little to base a strong view on. I
            still vote for time spent with John the Baptist beyond
            the Jordan as suggesting more.

            > I think it's quite reasonable to suppose that a very
            > high Christology for
            > Jesus was something that was late in developing. So
            > then don't you think
            > that this particular feature of Jn, i.e. absence of
            > the scene where Jesus
            > is being baptised by JB, was also a late
            > development?

            It's a reasonable position.

            > Well, I'm now proposing that there had indeed been
            > an earlier version of
            > Jn that did feature Jesus being baptised by JB. So,
            > in such a case, now we
            > may have identified some traces of that earlier
            > text.

            Maybe, but so far, I haven't been convinced by your
            posts because I have always seen other possible
            interpretations. Also, the MG really looks like a
            medieval harmonization based upon the four gospels and
            later Christian traditions.

            But, I admit that I haven't studied it closely. I
            doubt that I will due to lack of time and to my
            willingness to accept the standard scholarly position
            -- especially in cases where I lack time to develop
            the expertise needed for making an independent
            verification.

            Jeffery Hodges

            =====
            Assistant Professor Horace Jeffery Hodges
            Hanshin University (Korean Theological University)
            447-791 Kyunggido Osan-City
            Yangsandong 411
            South Korea

            __________________________________________________
            Do You Yahoo!?
            Yahoo! Sports - sign up for Fantasy Baseball
            http://sports.yahoo.com
          • Yuri Kuchinsky
            ... Dear Michael, The Magdalene Gospel is clearly not all of one piece, and there are substantial differences between different parts of MG. So, it really
            Message 5 of 17 , Mar 6, 2002
            • 0 Attachment
              On Fri, 1 Mar 2002, michael Hardin wrote:

              > These would be my questions Yuri:
              >
              > 1) In that the MG text reflects
              > synchronization/harmonization of the canonical
              > gospels, in what textual tradition would a greek
              > 'retranslation' stand (what is presupposed)? Or are
              > there affinities with several textual traditions?

              Dear Michael,

              The Magdalene Gospel is clearly not all of one piece, and there are
              substantial differences between different parts of MG. So, it really seems
              like a compilation, or a sort of a synopsis, of various gospel texts.

              Many segments of MG look a lot like harmonisations of various single
              gospel texts. Yet other segments represent straight narrative from single
              gospels.

              In general, I would say that MG reflects Western text of the gospels. Of
              course Western text is a lot better attested in Old Latin and in Semitic
              languages than in Greek. Myself, I'm quite sceptical that the Greek text
              should always be seen as the most reliable.

              > 2) The prologue as an early christians hymn (sans the
              > references to JTB) needs no defending. But also a
              > hymn grounded in a midrash of Gen 1 (Borgen)? I think
              > so. Kym Smith's Genesis observations are intruiging
              > here.
              >
              > If one wishes to see an earlier than canonical Jesus
              > tradition ( as do many Thomas/Q questers), I am not
              > persuded that MG would fit until I had examined the
              > passion narrative. As a meta-narrative where does it
              > place the death of Jesus, before or after Passover?
              > This would be a strong indication of it's provinence
              > at least East/West.

              The Passion Narrative in MG is a very complex patchwork of various texts.
              There's actually not much harmonisation that goes on there. Passages from
              the Synoptics and from Jn are usually cited sequentially, and there seems
              to be quite a lot of redundancy and repetition. Which would confirm, at
              least in my view, that this is not a well developed gospel harmony, but
              rather a synopsis of the gospels. Essentially, I see MG as the earliest
              version of the Diatessaron.

              > The Johannine tradition is of far more historical
              > value than given by the present state of NT research

              Yes, you may well be right about this.

              > who seem to reflect Clement of Alexandria. Dodd &
              > Robinson have laid an excelent foundation in this
              > regard. This is not to say that the gospel was not
              > produced in stages, only to say that perhaps Kym Smith
              > is correct to observe that it was the events which
              > upon reflection were associated with the
              > 'mythical/prophetic' archtypes, not the other way
              > around. (It is hish to time to stop paying homage to
              > Bousset)
              >
              > Some quick thoughts:
              >
              > MG 1.3 sound definitely post-Nicean so if it is early
              > it is already coming under the corrector's hand.

              Well, I've always avoided dealing with the first chapter of MG, because
              it's so different from our standard opening of Jn, although being similar
              to it in some respects. There are also problems with exact translation of
              this passage. You may observe that my translation of this first chapter is
              not exactly literal, so what you think may be post-Nicean elements may
              also be just my translation.

              > Can you identify that hand?

              It's very difficult to say. As I say, the first chapter presents its own
              very special problems of translation and interpretation. It may well have
              been expanded at a later stage.

              > MG 1.4 'law & prophets', a Matthean phrase if there
              > ever was one [can we call this the Matthean
              > thunderbolt in the Johannine gospel? ;)]

              Again, this may just be my translation... Whenever one really wants to
              deal with such stylistic aspects, one really needs to go directly to the
              Middle English text. But other chapters of MG don't usually present so
              many problems as this first chapter.

              > Strange that Zechariah could become high-priest, as
              > though he was from one of the four families, more
              > importantly, of Annas or Boethus (MG 2.3).

              Boismard has already studied these passages in considerable detail, and he
              seems to find a lot of primitive material there (L'EVANGILE DE L'ENFANCE
              (LUC 1 - 2) SELON LE PROTO-LUC (Etudes bibliques 35), Paris, J. Gabalda,
              1997). Myself, I haven't dealt with these passages too much, and went on
              to other stuff.

              > 3.29 The worship of Mary. Another indicator of the
              > author's hand? (as is the use of St. as in St. John)
              > The rise of a cult of Mary is not possible to
              > demonstrate prior to the fourth century (at the
              > earliest).

              Well, I don't see more "worship of Mary" in MG, necessarily, than in the
              standard texts. But perhaps we should stick more with the Johannine
              passages in this discussion.

              All the best,

              Yuri.

              Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.trends.ca/~yuku

              Whenever you find that you are on the side of the majority,
              it is time to reform -=O=- Mark Twain
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.